Head of DLC says "Opposing Wiretapping Dangerous for Dems..."

[CoffeeCat]

I'm really astounded by this article.

It's no big surprise that this is coming from the DLC. However, it is still very disturbing
and sickening.

Also, I'm from Iowa. Tom Vilsack, is my governor and I had such high hopes for him. He's
been progressive on many issues.

This really stinks.
-----------------------------FROM THE ARTICLE:
Gov. Tom Vilsack said Monday that Democrats risk political backlash if they object to the Bush administration's wiretapping but cannot show that Americans' civil liberties are at risk.

The Democratic governor, who is weighing a 2008 presidential bid, said the party will suffer if it continues to be perceived as weaker than Republicans on national security.

(snip)

"If the president broke the law, that's unacceptable. But I think it's debatable whether he did," Vilsack told Des Moines Register editors and reporters.

"And I think Democrats are falling into a very, very large political trap," he said. "Democrats are not going to win elections until they can reassure people they are going to keep them safe."

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060131/NEWS09/601310392

[Botany]

1. attn dems.

[samhsarah]

46. lol.

:rofl:

[LincolnMcGrath]

49. BAM

Botany kicking it up a notch. lol

[DeadManInc]

169. If they had spines we would not be where we are today.

Love the pic!

[woo me with science]

209. yes! nt

[Pithy Cherub]

247. Got Spine?

Without one it makes it impossible to stand firmly and proudly on moral bedrock democratic principles!

If MLK had said well, let's not have the March on Washington because folks just will not be pleased... Thank Goodness MLK & Coretta, out of many, stood tall in the face of potential and probable criticism!

[cantstandbush]

323. Living under the Bush regime is dangerous for Dems. so what! n/t

[Atman]

2. AAAAARRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHH!

VILSACK, KISS MY NUTSACK! YOU WILL NEVER, EVER BE PRESIDENT OF ANYTHING!

[msongs]

3. Vilsack refers to dems as "they.." has he become a repub now? nt

[alittlelark]

37. VERY good point.

[UL_Approved]

62. Could it be any clearer?

Do you really need to ask when this is coming as a position from someone?

He couldn't even identify with his party. What a tool.

[Kurovski]

102. A repub NOW?

He's DLC ain't he?

There's a reason Dean's campaign slogan was "I'm here to represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party."

The DLC too often fails to represent the Democratic Party.

[tavalon]

108. The DLC rarely fails to represent the Republican Party, though

They are the wolves in sheep's clothing.

[cyberpj]

158. I've heard they're actually plants - a plan from many years ago to

take down Dems.

Dunno about that, but these things make it believable.

[Wind Dancer]

236. It would explain a lot of things.

They hate liberals as much as the neocons.

[cyberpj]

240. and does anyone doubt Bush Sr. is capable of such a plan? Not me.

[Wind Dancer]

297. They aren't called the BFEE for nothing. n/t

[Iowa]

111. Vilsack is a prick...

and this is classic Vilsack - no vision of his own - simply mimicking the Republican playbook. He's dull, unimaginative, self-serving, uninspiring, and cold. When first elected here in Iowa, he kept many of his Republican predecessor's department heads. Some were rabid anti-labor types - the very biggest jerks in State government. Right before he was elected he went on national television and defended draconian mandatory sentencing laws that had been poorly written and had devastated the lives of some who were caught up in it. These were truly horrible miscarriages of justice, and he displayed not the slightest hint of compassion - because he has none. And just imagine a Dem coming out now and supporting the illegal domestic surveillance of US citizens by this band of criminals. The guy simply isn't driven by principle. Unlike an earlier poster, as an Iowan I have never had high hopes for Tom Vilsack, and he has met my expectations. He's a perfect fit for DLC chairman and a disgrace to the Democratic Party.

[Debi]

221. And to the Democrats of the State of Iowa! n/t

[tinfoilinfor2005]

264. He spoke at a convention that I attended recently. Of all the speakers,

his is the only speech I don't remember a word of. Totally forgettable.

[Iowa]

272. One more thing I forgot to mention about Vilsack...

It is widely known in Iowa government that Vilsack's department heads spy on the email of their employees - looking for dirt. Any criticism of the State's management is dealt with harshly via reprimand or outright dismissal. So what Bush is doing would appeal to Vilsack.

[deacon]

121. A poster boy for the criticism that the dems lack spine

His is the perfect example of what we don't need in our party.

[whododayis]

267. did dickhead morris write this crap for him?!?!?

[autorank]

314. Perfect point...now this his highly revealing!! n/t

[slay]

334. Vilsack needs a swift kick to the ballsack

if ya know what i'm sayin. ;) :puke:

[carnie_sf]

340. I don't think he has a ballsack

[emulatorloo]

4. How about opposing WARRANTLESS Wiretapping, Vilsack?

The trap is allowing Rove to blur the difference between legal and illegal wiretaps. Which apparently Vilsack is allowing Rove to do.

[ShockediSay]

58. Right! It's all about using the right memes

to appeal to the soundbite mentality

we do not oppose al qaeda wiretapping
we oppose police state spying on American Citizens

civil liberties?
hell, we're talking about FREEDOM in America from Big Government Spying
Freedom that comes with checks and balances
instead of giving a blank check to an executive branch
that FAILED TO PROTECT US FROM THE AL QAEDA 9/11 ATTACK WHEN THEY HAD ALL THE INFO THEY NEEDED.
This Big Government in it's great big war on terror MOST OF THE TIME SWEEPS UP THE WRONG PEOPLE IN ARRESTS AND DETENTIONS. American Citizens should be afraid of losing their freedom from this kind of thing, IN WHICH CASE THE TERRORISTS HAVE WON.

OUR BIG GOVERNMENT COULDN'T EVEN HELP ONE OF OUR MAJOR CITIES AVOID THE WORST EFFECTS OF A HURRICANE WHEN THEY HAD ALL THE INTELLIGENCE IN THE WORLD IT WAS COMING, IT WAS THERE, IT WAS FLOODING OUR CITIZENS

Gen Hayden this past Sunday said that it was too time consuming and troublesome to do the paperwork involved in getting warrants after the fact.

THIS IS A FAILURE OF EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP STRENGTH AND COMPETENCE, just like Katrina.

Remember, Karl Rove is behind their memes, and he's just another college dropout, and probably an un-indicted felon to boot.

[electropop]

301. My suggested meme: "warrantless" => "unwarranted"

Makes it clearer what's really going on.

[Tigress DEM]

84. Email to Vilsack

Govenor Vilsack,

What cowardice you display. If Democrats want to be elected in 2006 they better stand up for the rights of the people.

An eight grader can see the clear and simple logic of the FISA court and it DOES apply to the President.

SHAME on you for buckling under the pressure to back this President who breaks the law again and again and again and has hurt the American people so badly. Don't you care in the slightest about the legacy you leave behind?

NO ONE has said the President should not pursue the means to keep America safe from terrorists and you should have the moral fortitude to recognize the truth when you see it and not hide from it.

ALL the American people are asking is a COURTESY NOD to the Fourth Ammendment by having the President present probable cause to FISA before or after issuing his wiretap.

IF the reasons for his "spying on American's" is justifiable, it's just paperwork. But if his reasons are not justifiable then he is committing crimes against Americans and using 9/11 as a shield.

Dissent IS patriotic, sir. Especially if the words of dissent are simply the truth trying to be heard.

Shame on you for buying into the culture of lies and trying to sell your fellow DEMS downstream. Shame on you.

[Iowa]

113. Hey Tigress Dem, that's a terrific email, but...

Vilsack admitted a couple of years back that he doesn't know how to use email. True! The Des Moines Register quoted him on it, and I clipped the article at the time because I found it astounding that a governor wouldn't know how to use email - and that he'd be dumb enough to admit it to the press! So he probably wouldn't know how to open your email unless he has learned how to do so in the last couple of years. But he thinks he can be president.

[progressoid]

164. I think he must have taken some computer classes.

Now he even posts on his PAC website

http://www.heartlandpac.org/

(or he pays someone to do it for him)!

[freefall]

289. Great letter. n/t

[Safe as Milk]

335. Vilsack does make the perfect argument for...

the prototypical VICTIM. But besides the weak-kneed, trauma driven perspective, his logic is faulty on other grounds. As a condition for public acceptance, he place the onus of responsibility on Democrats to "show that their civil liberties are at risk." But this is a trap set by Vilsack and Republicans, because the Dems cannot pry specific evidence from Bush, and the Republicans refuse to insist in access to records. So what Vilsack is really saying is that the grassroots Dems can go to hell because Bush has a lock on Congress, which implies further that Congressional Dems now have permission to DO NOTHING in the face of rising fascism.

Way to go, DLC. Have you gotten your daily talking points from Karl yet?

[Erika]

5. He just lost my vote if he chooses to run

The war mongering, the wire tapping, and the fear needs to end NOW. If the dems don't get it, they won't get a buck in contributions.

[FreedomAngel82]

6. Oh good grief!

I was listening to the CSPAN callers and everyone but two were pissed off about it. These people are WRONG! I'm glad John Kerry isn't affiliated with them anymore and same with Gore. Ugh!

[AlGore-08.com]

199. Gore broke with them a long time ago

eom

[BulletproofLandshark]

7. Vilsack is a fucking coward.

If he's not willing to fight these criminals, then he and the rest of the Quisli.., I mean, DLCers need to make way for people who are.

[radio4progressives]

80. Vilsack is a Major Party leader - He Chaired the DNC Platform Meetings

in 2004 - he also strong armed delegates to drop their anti-war and anti-patriot act amendments to the 2004 party platform.

and he's very much DLC...

now understand, these are the bastards are calling the shots in the party.

enuf said? no?

well just tonight i received a report from Orange Co. (Ca.) that the DP Central Committee endorsing REPUBLICAN candidates, receing FUNDING FROM THE DCCC, when it's a rule not to endorse candidates who are not registered dems, in the meanwhile Liberal candidates (in Orange Co.) are struggling, working their assess off and are being IGNORED by the DCCC.

If this doesn't spell PURGE of LIBERALS/PROGRESSIVES to anyone here, i don't know what in the hell to say.

[karynnj]

178. Am I missunderstanding something?

Are you saying the Democratic Party (DCCC) is giving money to REPUBLICAN candidates? (as opposed to conservative Democratic candidates). I actually have a problem even if you mean they are giving money in the primaries to conservative Democratic candidates who have liberal opponents. The money would be better used in the general election.

I'm glad I didn't give them money, preferring to give money directly to candidates usually through KAP (Kerry's PAC) or to the DNC. (I trust Kerry and Dean, not Emmanuel.)

[Tigress DEM]

328. NO. DLC is all by itself.

DLC is the group that posted that "Republican Lite" DEM Agenda awhile back.

I don't know a lot about it, but I've heard if you're really worried about where your money is going, the safest bet is DNC. I didn't know Kerry had one. Cool learn something new everyday.

[radio4progressives]

330. In Orange County, California

don't know about anywhere else - it was a report by a party activist working his ass off trying to get from support from the party for a Democratic candidate campaigning in O.C. -- instead apparently funding registered Republicans in the country - cuz the Reeps got big bucks and is "popular" ...

purging progressives and Liberals from the party by not supporting their campaign efforts, but funding Republicans contenders instead.

[Cocoa]

8. they know it's a risk

they're taking it, thankfully.

[Mythsaje]

9. No surprise...

And people wonder why some DUers absolutely despise the DLC.

[KoKo]

237. Exactly...Every time Bush trashes the Constitution a DLC Dem comes out

and supports the Republicans. It's long past time for this to STOP! And, they think we on the "internets" are Riff/Raff... Sheesh!

[Mythsaje]

320. I'd rather be riff-raff than a quisling. n/t

[lvx35]

10. Why is he playing into the trap???

"opposing wiretapping"? Listen to the wording...its illegal wiretapping without a warrant and without judicial oversight.

[Leopolds Ghost]

26. Because he's helping set the trap

The purpose of the DLC is to provide the semblance of an opposition
party so corporate donors can claim they give to both parties equally.

Its function is similar to the robot in Steven King's _Dark Tower V_.

[niallmac]

75. Yes! Only DLC is scarier than a Steven King novel.n/t

[Leopolds Ghost]

280. Long Days And Pleasant Nights, sai! I am VILSACK, human-cyborg relations!

DLC model, "Joementum" Class XVII, manufactured 1998 in Washington, DC.

Would you like to hear your horoscope? A tall, dark, Southern moderate is in your future. Great Danger for the Democratic Party in 2006! Outland Muslims will steal your children in 28 days' time, sai. Only the Republican Party can be trusted with our safety! Preserve your gunpowder well, gunslingers!

[Safe as Milk]

336. Looks like the DLC..

Hangs out in Karl Rove's bedroom.

[Tigress DEM]

86. Because the rethugs still own the VOTING machines.

These guys are getting a lot of pressue, but we have to give them more.

Pretty soon one of them is going to explode.

I wouldn't be too sad to see it happen to this guy. He sounds a lot like our former mayor of St Paul, MN Randy Kelly who supported *ush against Kerry and was found to be taking money from the RNC.

[Epiphany4z]

151. Makes you wonder

what info they have gotten from the illegal wire taps and who they are holding it against.

[goodboy]

11. then, let me say...FUCK THE DLC! Go join the repukes where you belong!

[OrwellwasRight]

68. You took the words right out of my mouth!!

I do not want to be any part of a party that gives away civil rights because it is "not a winning political issue."

It is a matter of principle, for fuck's sake!!

[goodboy]

99. The DLC (R-hypocrites) stands for (Dicks (who) Love Conservatives)

[LittleClarkie]

83. Shouldn't I get to know them first?

The LEAST they could do is buy me dinner.

[goodboy]

94. clarkie,here's the equation for a date with the DLC Repuke-Lite Hypocrites

take every bad date you've ever had (F)

multiply that by a factor of uselessness (U)

Carry the corruption (C)

and add Repuke ass sucking (K)

F x U /C + K

there you have it.

[wtmusic]

12. That crosses him off my list for 2008 nt

[Innocent Smith]

13. There is some truth in it being dangerous

And there is a word for when you do the right thing even if it is dangerous: Courage

It would be refreshing to see an article that said we are going to do the right thing instead of always talking about doing the expedient thing with no reference to whether it is right or wrong.

edit: typo

[Leopolds Ghost]

41. Courage

"What makes the leopard get his spots? Courage.
What makes the Hottentots so hot? Courage.
What do they have that I don't got? Courage!"

"What if it's an elephant?"

"I'd wrap him up in cellophant!"

"What about a neocon?"

"He'd learn not to mess with me-ocon!"

"What about the NSA?"

"They will learn to rue the day!"

Meanwhile the wizard shouts:

"I am the GREAT AND POWERFUL DLC! You have no chance against the Wicked witch of the West Texas! Never mind that man over there..."

[OrwellwasRight]

70. Love it. Bravo. Send it in a letter to the DNC, DSCC, DCCC, and DLC.

Let them know we need them to stand up for our rights. They are not hearing it.

Nice work. :yourock:

[tularetom]

14. "Keep them safe" WTF?

What is wrong with these people? If you think you have all the answers to how Democrats can win elections, Mr. Vilsack, then I suggest that you base your 2008 presidential run on endorsement of *'s illegal wiretapping. While you're at it, gun registration would keep us all safe from terrorism so why don't you endorse that too. That'd really show 'em how tough on terraists you are.:sarcasm:

[The Traveler]

15. We must drive these little wimps

from their seats of power over the Democratic Party. There is a time for moderation and conciliation. That time is past. Win, lose, or draw, it is time to take a stand for what is right and in opposition to what is wrong.

And make damn sure we win.

[mmonk]

16. This party had better split

because I view the DLC as republican or neocon or something. I cannot support the idea that anyone who supports this administration even when it breaks the laws of this land is a democrat. If this is what it means to be a democrat then I will leave.

[CoffeeCat]

23. I agree, I am no longer loyal to the Dem party...

I never thought I would say that. Never.

I sat next to a Nader supporter at Michael Moore's "Slacker Tour" speech, and I wanted to kill the guy. I considered him as big a problem as the Repubs.

A couple of years ago, I couldn't have imagined contemplating voting for a third-party candidate.

Now, I feel absolutely no loyalties to the Dem party anymore.

I am changing my registration to Independent.

Many in our party have decided to succumb to--instead of fight--the corrupt path the Reps are taking us down. I guess Karl Rove is just too big and scary for these wussies.

Word to our spineless, wussy Dems. This is not high school. You do not have to impress "Big Man on Campus" Rover and melt into his every whim. Stand up and fight like patriotic Americans, instead of allowing some trashy, puffy-faced bully dictate your every move.

Idiots.

[PetraPooh]

96. AS H.Dean said . . . I support the Dem wing of the Dem Party . .

I support the democratic wing of the democratic Party. But you are right the party seems to be suffering from split personality disorder, if not Multiple. . . .

[Guaranteed]

28. And they're STUPID. nt

[Bluebear]

38. DLC is so foreign to my ideals, I can't believe they are even Dems anymore

nt

[whododayis]

345. i'm right behind you on this

[fooj]

17. Has everyone lost their fricking minds?

:banghead:

[Marr]

18. "If"? "If" he broke the law?

The man bragged about it. On national television. He promised to keep on doing it until he leaves office. There is no question that he broke the law. There is a question as to whether the law matters anymore, and unfortunatley, Mr. Vilsack hasn't got an opinion.

[LynneSin]

19. Good - let him wiretap everyone in the state of Iowa

As for the rest of us in this country stay the hell away from us! We are not interested!

[LincolnMcGrath]

32. HEY!

That ain't fair. lol I created a new term for losing strategies such as these. VILSACKIAN

Feel free to use it.

[tavalon]

109. Thanks

I think thats a meme we need to spread.

[Debi]

224. Hey....some of us Iowans don't like the guy either!! n/t

[shanti]

20. this is such BULLSHIT!

:grr: he's been drinking the koolaid!

[Guaranteed]

21. PURE IDIOCY. Vilsack, you're not only a coward, you're a fucking

moron.

We WIN this issue, dumbshit.

[Leopolds Ghost]

22. Head of DLC says: "Never mind that man behind the curtain!"

[jean]

24. spineless, following in the shadow of the RNC

[MisterP]

25. "let's give Chimpy everything his heart desires and yell 'VICTORY'!"

"We er winning!!!!1111"
von Papen 4 eva!

[rucky]

27. ...as Scaife wires more money into his Swiss Bank Account.

Wanna make Americans feel safer? QUIT SCARING THEM.

[Dr Fate]

29. I need one example of how going along with Bush has benefited DEMs.

Just one example. One.

Any takers?

[Cocoa]

44. Afghanistan

[Dr Fate]

57. We were for that to get Bin Laden- not to go along with Bush.

Bush is apparently there to do anything but capture Bin Laden.

How does our current situation in Afghanistan benefit Democrats?

[Cocoa]

66. dems can correctly say they supported Bush in the war on terror

if they had opposed Bush in Afghanistan, as some strongly demanded, they could not say it as convincingly.

[Dr Fate]

71. True- and have the credibility to ask where Bin Laden is..

But tax cuts, Iraq- or even wire-tapping- following Bush will bite us in the ass every time. Pretty much every time!

If I really wanted to argue with ya- I'd say that being in Afghanistan will not benefit either party too much further down the road. Another topic though...

[iconoclastNYC]

225. Didn't you hear. Iraq is now the war on terror.

The war on terror is as much of a joke as was the Cold War. The NEOCON need perpetual war so they can keep up the economic imperialism.

Everyone please download and watch The Power of Nightmares. So powerful!

[Pacifist Patriot]

128. Pipeline

[Jujiman]

206. Afghanistan: The NATO Quagmire

Sorry, no dice...QUAGMIRE

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=MEY20060123&articleId=1786

:eyes:

[bvar22]

78. Some Dems....

...are getting a little something extra in their pay envelopes and promises of a RICH job and retirement for them and their families from CorpoAmerika.......(know what I mean, Vern?)

The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[Tigress DEM]

88. Only the corrupt ones

Selling their souls for fixed votes and RNC money in the back door.

[Lorien]

30. Can we cut these people loose already? n/t

[LincolnMcGrath]

31. This was in the Iowa forum last week.

This is why the DLC needs to eff off!

GOP creates a false charge

DLC gives it credence

[ClintonTyree]

171. No, they're just "keeping their powder dry"......

for when the REAL issues come up! :eyes: What those issues could possibly be....... maybe nuking a major U.S. City to "cleanse" it or something of that order. Nah, I imagine the DLC would even cave in on that. They seem to love everything bush has done so far, they certainly haven't put up any resistance.

In the past, whenever I brought up the point that the DLC was NOT working for our best interests, I was chastised and told that the DLC was taking the "smart" tack, that they were going to beat the Republicans at their own game. :rofl: It's pretty plain to see that the DLC is becoming PART of the Republicans game.

Maybe Ralph Nader was correct. Perhaps he should have said, "there's not a dime's worth of difference between the DLC DEMOCRATS and the Republicans", and as far as I'm concerned, there isn't. I'm not a Nader fan but it's becoming quite apparent that a certain faction of the Democratic party IS no different that the Republican Party. That faction is the DLC. They're trying to push Liberal Democrats out of the Party and they're doing a damned good job.

[Straight Shooter]

33. I can't look ahead if I'm always looking over my shoulder.

Try to get a grip on yourself, Vilsack, and frame this argument properly. We don't want Big Brother, especially if he's an incompetent miserable failure like bush.

Why hasn't anyone asked the question, "Tell the truth: Do you trust bush to make decisions involving national security when he couldn't even comprehend the import of the August 6, 2001, PDB?"

[LincolnMcGrath]

35. Thank You

Maybe the DLC should hire more Ex GOP activists to do their thinking for them. :eyes:

[Straight Shooter]

47. It's as if every day is a brand-new day for the DLC.

What happened yesterday doesn't matter. They don't learn any lessons from watching the bush operatives in action.

Dirty Little Crooks. I'm beginning to believe they are in cahoots with the Repubs all the way up to their greasy money-stained eyebrows.

[Leopolds Ghost]

53. It's like they're a goose in a new world n/t

[hopeisaplace]

34. what a crock of shit

ok..what did they get on him during his wiretap?
that's how it looks, cause what a stupid thing to say.

"keep them safe" !!!!!!!!!!!!! people, GLOBALLY are less
safe than I can ever recall due to the antics of this
mis-administration.

What a pathetic statement by this person. TOTALLY PATHETIC.

[okieinpain]

36. actually he's correct. if the dems don't get some back bone and

dig for the dirt to show bfee used the wire taps to spy on regular americans. then the bfee will be able to sell the wiretaps as the war on terror.

[seabeyond]

40. easy to call names. how are they going to get the info if they

dont have investigation. you say back bone. i say, .... how are they gonna get it. say rpetty please. bushco's are deleting things as fast as they can and still they dont get in trouble. make a suggestion what dems are suppose to do once they get their backbone

[okieinpain]

92. I posted "that if they don't get a back bone and dig for the dirt",

they are too passive. they won't get dirty like the repugs. when is being called a conservative going to be as dirty as being called a liberal.

dems have to set that tone, right now it's not happening.

[ComerPerro]

270. You are exactly right

right now it is a political trap. Unless we can prove to the American people that they have broken laws and are spying on people they shouldn't, we just sound crazy.

Karl Rove isn't considered a briliant strategist just because he is really good at planning and running campaigns.

His true brilliance comes in his complete disregard for laws and ethics, and his willingness to break laws and do bold things (wiretaps, war, 9/11) in order to trap his opponents. And he has the media on his side, ensuring that he gets to set the agenda for discussion and frame the debates.

[seabeyond]

39. how can you show civil liberteries at risk if you cant see

oh i know we are suppose to trust bush. and election fraud, suppose to trust bush and diebold....9/11 trust bush, reports studies, statistics.... trust bush. plame not outed trust bush

bullshit

[ComerPerro]

271. That's why its called a "trap"

[savemefromdumbya]

42. very unhelpful comment!

theretheygoagain! DLC neocons

[incapsulated]

43. Ah, the DLC...

The Devil's Little C .... well the word I'm thinking of locked a thread, so I'll leave it to your collective imaginations...

[samhsarah]

45. ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?!?!

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[quiet.american]

63. I second that emotion!

:banghead: :banghead: :spank: :banghead: :banghead: :spank: :banghead: :banghead: :spank: :banghead: :banghead: :spank: :banghead: :banghead: :spank:

[Tom Rinaldo]

48. This is what we too often get when Democrats try to "act tough"

They say "I can be just as strong as a Republican but I also care about people". It NEVER works. It is a very, very, large political trap. Show where the Republicans are WRONG on National Security, don't just say "We can do that too". That leads to scampering to find cover by "supporting our President". This is the way of Lieberman. The Republicans are weakening our National Security through colossal errors and incompetence that weaken our military, strengthen our enemies, and drain our treasury; having neglected to plan for real threats both abroad and at home. Instead of confronting them on that Vilsak is willing to sacrifice the Constitution, if need be, in an attempt to avoid a feared perception of weakness. Aaaargh Indeed!

[incapsulated]

59. They have no independent conception of National Security

The DLC's idea of National Security is fellating Bush or being silent. This is what the CORPORATIONS THAT FUND THE DLC WANT.

What the Democrats need is an answer to the failure of Bush on this issue, which is underscored by the war and the general disapproval of it. It's right there for the taking.

[EFerrari]

50. I didn't put this together until this weekend but, I left the party

as a direct result of the DLC.

I think they are wrong. You all know better than I do.

[ClintonTyree]

175. You may be right........

I could do far more damage to the Republican party from within. :evilgrin: It appears as if that's what they've been doing to the Democratic party. I can't believe what passes for a "Democrat" today. A Nixon Republican would now be called a "Democrat". Maybe I'll switch as well, I would sincerely love to be "the enemy within". ;)

[AtomicKitten]

51. Vilsack has "sack" in his name - nuff said.

However, this wiretapping is dicey - NO I DON'T AGREE WITH HIM - because the Rs intend to twist it to their advantage, if we let them. First, calling it the Terrorist Surveillance Program has been picked up by Faux News and the talking heads. That needs to be changed by constant repetition back to Domestic Spying and we must hammer home that it is ILLEGAL.

This can be a huge issue to our advantage but we are going to have to arm-wrestle them for it.

[LincolnMcGrath]

54. He is certifiably

Vilsackian

[Rex]

52. Debatable? Horseshit. Another DINO

why doesn't anyone talk about the MOUNTAIN of shows and documents on how we are LESS safe now then when Bush took office! I now see how the nazis easily took total control over Germany. No body stopped them, not even people who knew better.

[savemefromdumbya]

55. DLC = neocon poodles

It's like this - Gov Vilsack - keep your mouth firmly shut in future

[LincolnMcGrath]

56. Where are all the centrists hiding? lol

DEFEND THIS

DEFEND THE TAX VOTES

[Moochy]

89. I'll try and channel one...

Oh great spirits of the DLC Booster club, we call on you!! the DU is being overrun by "Leftist Scum" (lights some black candles) Come O great spewer of vitriol and hatred, thou most holy flip-flopper of ancient renown!

"Vilsack is smarter than all of you leftist scum, why dont you all just go away and stop clogging this forum...
What's funny is I'm smarter than all of you, commie bastards.... (snicker)"

Ugh now I have to go see an exorcist. :evilgrin: :sarcasm: just to be clear

[LincolnMcGrath]

346. !

:rofl:

[bread_and_roses]

135. I was wondering same. And V is a coward AND a FOOL

Nothing like repeating your opponents talking points against you over and over. The Dems could go on the attack over "security" with all the ammunition this mal-administration has provided. But do they? No. They keep repeating that they are "percieved" as "weak" on "security." The Rs scarcely need to say it - the cowardly quislings do it for them over and over.

[mdmc]

142. But... Its naders fault!

The Dems wouldn't need to discuss wiretapping if bad, bad Ralph wasn't so naughty, naughty. God Bless the DLC and corporate Dems...

[HootieMcBoob]

60. DLC gives best campaign advice

all you have to do is the opposite of whatever they suggest and you're guaranteed to have a successful campaign! :)

[Yollam]

61. Yeah, that whole democracy/rule of law/limits on presidential power thing-

-was a real drag.

Thank God we have the DLC to show us the way.

:puke:

[kiteinthewind]

64. The DLC aren't even Dems!

As far as I'm concerned they can go to hell. I am sick of them. Want nothin' to do with them. I want Feingold for 2008. Tell me, he has never been affiliated with those freaks has he? :eyes:

[LincolnMcGrath]

65. THIS is FRONT PAGE Material

IMHO

Better to fire a shot across the DLC bow, than continue to allow them to shoot us in the foot.

[Nutmegger]

67. Spinelessness kills

I would at least link to feel like I belong to an opposition party.

[tavalon]

110. Don't confuse the DLC with Democrats

They are different animals, like elephants and donkeys.

[farmbo]

69. Here's an email link for this once- promising DLCer

http://www.governor.state.ia.us/comments/capitol_correspond/index.html

And here's what I wrote to our bed wetting Iowa Governor:

Dear Governor Vilsack:

Your DLC comments betray a profound misunderstanding of both the present Domestic Spying controversy and the intellect of the American Public.

First, it is not a choice between keeping America safe on the one hand or complying with the Forth Amendment on the other. FISA allows both since it provides for retroactive applications as late as 72 hours after the intercept. We were hit on 9/11 under Bush's watch even though two of the hijackers were living with an FBI informant and were in the San Diego phone book for a year.It never occurred to Bush to tap their phones legally.

This is a specious, straw man argument that Karl Rove has espoused which perverts the very idea of self-government. You should be ashamed of yourself for even repeating it.

Second, the American voter will not run scarred into Rove's arms on this issue (although it appears YOU have).
The majority of Americans believe the Fourth Amendment needs to be protected, and will respond to a reasoned criticism of Bush's arrogant conduct-- unless the Democrats also loose their nerve.

Please, you owe your country an apology for insinuating that Rove is right and that we need to scuttle our Constitution to keep this country safe.

[JHB]

197. The 9/11 argument is doubly specious...

I think it was Cheney who first mouthed the notion that "If we'd been able to do this before 9/11 we could have prevented it", but that's just counting on peoples' short memories:

Before 9/11 terrorism was a backburner issue for the Administration, with its organizational priority, manpower, and funding cut from what they were under the Clinton Administration. If they'd had the cover to do it before 9/11 (and it seems they did, cover or not), there's no indication they would have used it against Saudi nationals any more than they used legal means to surveil them.

[me b zola]

72. Hey Vilsack!

There was this group of people who took a risk in the 1770's. At risk of their own death the kicked out a certain king george and wrote themselves a Declaration of Independence & later the Constitution. For you, Vilsack, or any other Dino that is too week-kneed to protect what those patriots did, I say get the fuck out of the way and STFU!

[depakid]

73. Here we go again

I've come to the conclusion that these types are FAR greater enemies than Republicans.

The far right is eminantly beatable provided that the Dems EVER stood up and denounced them for what they are and put forward a united front and exposed their egregoous policies for what they are.

That won't happen until the party quite literally purges itself of DLC types. theyre a scourge and need to put muzzled and rlegated to the fringe, where they belong.

[radio4progressives]

91. Instead, the DLC is purging Liberals...

the question before the rank and file, is are you going to take this bullshite any longer laying down? This isn't about the "far left" fringe being purged from this party as some functionaries or nin-cum-poops would have everyone believe.

Indeed, the DLC have been and are now MORE THAN EVER involved in the PURGING LIBERALS and LIBERAL/PROGRESSIVE PRINCIPLES from the party.

Evidence of this has been in front us from the Senate, to local precincts in BLUE STATES.

Rank and File party members better face this issue head on right now - November is less 10 months away - and that's NOT a lot of time to confront and deal with issue.

I mean in the flesh and in person. better come up with a strategy to confront these bastards now.

[Raksha]

339. Yes, the Democratic Party needs to purge the DLC types

and equally important, we need to let them KNOW we are doing it and we need to LET THEM KNOW WHY!!! If Vilsack has any illusions that he's going to run for President in 2008, then Vilsack needs to be TARGETED for defeat. Instead of allowing them to marginalize the progressive majority, we need to marginalize THEM and drive them out of the Democratic Party. The world needs to know that these people DO NOT represent the Democratic Party in any way whatsoever.

[kevinbgoode]

74. Well, he can kiss off any thoughts of becoming President

but perhaps someone should send him a copy of the U.S. Constitution and ask him what he thinks about the oath of office.

[EC]

76. I don't see Hillary going with this line of thinking on this... n/t

[katinmn]

165. Huh? She's on the DLC leadership team! See here?

It can't be any more plain than this

DLC Leadership Team

From left to right: U.S. Sen. Tom Carper is vice chair of the DLC; U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is chair of the DLC's American Dream Initiative; Al From is founder and CEO of the DLC; Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack is chair of the DLC; (Not pictured: Bruce Reed is DLC president; Pennsylvania State Representative Jennifer Mann is chair of the DLC's State Legislative Advisory Board (SLAB); Columbus (OH) Mayor Michael Coleman is chair of the DLC's Local Elected Officials Network(LEON).)

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ka.cfm?kaid=137

[karynnj]

173. Being in the DLC, even in its leadership

doesn't mean giving up your ability to take a different position. (Note that the DLC Senators vote range from mostly in line with what's wanted here to never in line with a liberal/progressive view point.)

[SaveElmer]

185. Hillary has already spoken harshly about the spying program...

Vilsack is wrong on this...doesn't mean that is the position of the majority of the folks in the DLC. Contrary to what most would like you to believe, they are far from a monolithic entity.

[karynnj]

191. I'm not surprised - every sane Democrat is saying the same thing

Hillary is a lawyer - there's a huge difference between saying there needs to be judicial oversight, so you need a warrant and saying no wire taps.

[understandinglife]

77. The head of the DLC does Karl Rove's dirty work, gratis. Tells you ...

... why the D in DLC stands for DUPLICITOUS ... The best thing that could ever happen to the Democratic Party, and America, is for everyone to put those creeps out of business.


Peace.

[Tigress DEM]

79. Man needs to be edumacated.

Tom Vilsack --- FISA look it up, fool.

Choice is not between no wiretapping / let the terrorists win and wiretap everyone because the pRes says so....

IT'S Called get a warrant from FISA - you know the secret court available 24X7 just for the pRes to use for this kind of thing?

Please!

[LittleClarkie]

81. Dems are in jepardy for showing that something's illegal?

When it is?

The only thing I get out of his comment is that Dems have to make their case strongly. Aside from that, he's saying that we should just agree with the Republicans on national security, as folks perceive them as being strong on national security.

What he forgets is that during the last election, Kerry gained ground when he didn't shy away from the issue, but met it head on. The debate that was supposed to be his weakest turned out to be his strongest.

What the American people need to realize is that the Republicans have been snowing them. The Republicans made the people believe that they were strong on national security, but the party that actually gives a shit about them and their safety is the Democratic Party. It's all about appearances with the Republicans. If they want substance, they want us. We may not be perfect. But at least we give a shit.

[Katherine Brengle]

82. Welcome to the Reich...

This is so classic... When I was younger, and learning about the history of the world for the first time, I couldn't believe how people could let themselves be brought into fascist dictatorships...

Now it's becoming clear. It comes, on small step at a time, slowly weeding out opposition until it dominates... It promises safety in exchange for a little bit of freedom here and a little bit of freedom there, until you have none left, and no safety...

(BTW, I am considering writing my first book. There has been much talk around blogs and progressive news sites and whatnot about the resemblance of our current atmosphere with fascism, but it seems like no one has gone into it in full depth. If anyone has any suggestions, I am just getting started, so send 'em on over.)

[Moochy]

85. Quick someone call the Dynamic DLC Duo!

Flash the giant "B" in the sky, the "Leftist wackos" are at it again! (snicker) :sarcasm:

[buddysmellgood]

87. FUCK Vilsack

[leftstreet]

90. Oh. This must be what they meant by "A Better Way"

...to lose elections.
:eyes:

[Trillo]

93. "Danger" Will Robinson, danger! (n/t)

[Neil Lisst]

95. How can anyone take seriously a guy named Ballsack?

It is Ballsack, right?

[incapsulated]

97. I believe it's pronounced "shitsack"

I think that's the correct pronunciation.

[fujiyama]

148. I thought it was

VilSuck...

[Burried News]

329. It is WillSuck as in will suck the chrome off the trailer hitch of an SUV

with a Bush/Cheney sticker.

[Warren DeMontague]

98. It's "Debatable"?

HOW THE FUCK IS IT "DEBATABLE"?

The only way this is a "trap" is if we LET THEM DEFINE IT THAT WAY.

The President BROKE THE LAW. There is NO FUCKING WAY that the FISA law could possibly be 'interfering' with any legitimate "terror" investigation. The warrants could be obtained retroactively for up to 72 god-damn hours!

I've had it with these DLC pinheads.

[Odin2005]

100. ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR FUCKING MIND, GOVERNOR?

:argh:


The Dem canidate in 2008 WILL be a DLC creep, the corporate powers that be will make sure of it. :grr:

[Raydawg1234]

104. That means Hilary

[obxhead]

101. you should add his e-mail to your post.

I've got a few words and am on the hunt for it. I really hate to dislike the Dem's, yet they give me so many reasons to do so. :(

[Raydawg1234]

103. This is why Democrats lose!!!!!

They just have no fucking balls!!!!!

God dammed cowards should be kicked out of the party. He is the one falling into the trap. The trap is trying to "appease" everybody, by doing this they allow the Republicans to dictate their actions.

Democrats need to stand up and say that the war on terror is half bullshit anyway. They need to say that the war in Iraq does not make us safer!!!!!!!!!!!!!

When are these losers ever going to learn. They are never going to learn if they buy into the spin. They are trying to get elected, just for the sake of being elected, and they stand for nothing.

We need dems who stand for something!!!!!!!

[I_Make_Mistakes]

105. OK What if there is another terrorist attack (We have been warned

). I agree that Osama always appear at questionable time intervals, but, we already had a NSA guy (lying sack of potatoes) say that this program could've prevented 911 (BS, and we all know it!).

That would be the trap, if, OBL (or his possible US surrogates) actually perpetrated another attack.

The WORD Mr. Colbert would be "Wiretappin". I agree fully with the fact that this wiretapping is illegal and unconstitutional and Anti-American, but, that is the possible downfall of this action.

There would be another Bush bot lying sack to say that it would've been prevented!

[Raydawg1234]

107. consider though the recent news that 99% of the calls listened to,

were cleared of any terrorist connection.

[I_Make_Mistakes]

112. I hear you and agree. The problem is the Republican base is

undereducated and proud of it (they hate the intellectual elite, remember?).

I used the quote the other week to my mom, "Scare, scare, fear, fear" that is what (those in power)they try to do! My use was in reference to the Avian Flu. I haven't been here for awhile so, I don't know if the University of Pittsburgh vaccine was discussed. It was on a news report (ABC, NBC or CBS) here one day, and nothing (blackout). My mom, in PA never even heard about it!

So, getting back to my point, they (Repubs/Conservatives) need an enemy, (environmental, national, terroristic) to scare the HELL out of people to remain in control. That being said, these people are so irrational (lacking the skills to discern between true fear and fear-mongering) they want to eliminate the fear by things like nuking the whole region. I guess, the masses are so afraid of the possible enemy, that they believe things like the wiretapping would've prevented 911. They will believe any BS, because they can't see the tree from the forest (our govt wouldn't mess with it's own citizenry).

So, if the attack, OBL spoke of were to occur, it would be the Dem's fault (if they fight the wiretapping, because the wire tapping would have prevented it, because those people in the Middle East are not as smart as these ignorant Americans!). These people, have no clue about other countries, they actually don't get that the rest of the world is not only modernized, but in some cases, more modernized then the US.

[CoffeeCat]

342. And herein lies a HUGE inconsistency which exposes everything--------

Seriously.

If, as you said, "99 % of the calls listened to were cleared of any terrorist connection"--how can that be?????

Junior said that he is ONLY listening to Al Queda calls coming into the United States.

So...are we to believe that "99%" of the Al Queda calls coming into the United States were not about terrorism? Al Queda was calling Joe Blow in Cincinnati to discuss the Reds game?

This does not even make sense.

Also--I don't remember the source--but one government official said that there were "thousands" of calls which were involved. "Thousands?" Thousands of Al Queda call into the United States? Let's assume that this is true. Are we to actually believe that, again--"99% of these Al Queda calls into the US had no connection to terrorism?"

[tavalon]

106. Democrats risk political backlash

Um, so the fuck what, Governor Vilsack? There is something we call "the right thing to do" and it isn't necessarily politically expedient, Governor Vilsack. I suggest you go and think about that for a while, Governor Vilsack. Barring that, just STFU.

[stickdog]

114. Democrats are not going to win elections until they prove to people

that they have spines! I'll going to call him Tom Vil from now on, because he's completely lost his sack.

You don't keep people safe by gutting the Bill of Rights, asshole.

[leftchick]

115. The DLC Founder Gave Money to bush In 2004!!

The DLC is not at all about getting Democrats elected. Quite the opposite....

WHEN YOU'VE LOST THE NEW REPUBLIC . . . Tapped's new favorite thing is the Federal Election Commission database where you can type in anyone's name and see if he or she has donated money to political candidates or parties. (Tapped's old favorite thing was The Washington Post's home buyer database, where you could learn how much your neighbors spent for their apartments.) So check out this nifty little listing (go here and search for "Steinhardt, Michael") that we discovered while trying to see which big-shot New Democrats were supporting which Democratic presidential candidates: According to this list, Michael Steinhardt, former Democratc Leadership Council stalwart and part-owner of The New Republic, gave $2,000 to Bush-Cheney '04 Inc. on June 20, 2003.

Now, we know that there's often little direct relationship between a magazine owner's politics and the views of its writers, but it is a notable thing when one of the more prominent New Democrats around starts financing the continuation of the Bush administration.

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2003/07/index.html#001288

[seemslikeadream]

125. Michael Steinhardt, former Democratc Leadership Council stalwart

:hi:

[leftchick]

137. hey!

how are you?

:hi:

[PassingFair]

349. Don't forget PNAC signatory...

Will Marshall!

Treasonous bastard.

[deacon]

116. It's not debatable at all, he has broke and is breaking the law n/t

[LincolnMcGrath]

117. ONLY 16 recommendations?

[PBass]

119. The 2008 Dem primaries just got a little simpler, IMO. (eom)

[deacon]

118. If you can't see he broke the law you have no business being a

lawmaker-period.

[Zhade]

120. K/R

NT!

[The Backlash Cometh]

122. YOU HAVE TO POST THE LIST OF PEOPLE WHO WERE TARGETED.

How much easier can it be? Once they realize that it's not just muslim extremists, they'll get the message.

[JCMach1]

123. Mr. Vilsack can bite my

sack on this one...

[MoJoWorkin]

124. All I can say is "GOOD GAWD"---what is happening in Iowa lately

Harkin seems to be voting the wrong way (he used to be a good one) and now this? Why can't the DLC'ers see their wimpy attitude will get them absolutely NOWHERE?
I guess they can't see it for the dollar signs. :puke: :banghead: :puke: :banghead: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

[Iowa]

286. Vilsack has always been a tool...

This is classic Vilsack, although the depth of his contempt for the rule of law and Democratic principles is breathtaking on this one. Hard to imagine he's actually a lawyer.

[seemslikeadream]

126. Steinhardt- Part owner/financier of the New Republic and of the conservati

Michael Steinhardt- Part owner/financier of the New Republic and of the conservative New York Sun

Why would Steinhardt, a Democrat who essentially seeded and watered the Progressive Policy Institute, the think-tank appendage of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), want to finance a newspaper that will have the Sun's conservative politics? Why would Hertog, a man of the right and chairman of the Manhattan Institute, the prominent conservative think tank, want a piece of the liberal (more than not, anyway) New Republic? Why, aside from the obvious relief of financial stress, would TNR owner Martin Peretz reduce himself to a minority interest in the magazine he's supported for 28 years?

The answer may be best expressed not by Hertog, Steinhardt, or Peretz, but by Seth Lipsky, editor of the Sun and a man whose decade-long dream of starting a new New York daily is finally coming to fruition. "The right wing of the Democratic Party," Lipsky told me recently, "is a depressed stock." (...)It's exactly on the right-most edge of the Democratic cliff -- where the DLC begins to morph into, say, the American Enterprise Institute; where neoliberalism and neoconservatism, each of which is a vestigial presence now in the twenty-first century, collapse into some new entity (...)

(snip)

Steinhardt chaired the DLC for six years but left in 1996 in disgust, not over Whitewater or women, but because in his first two years in office, according to Steinhardt, Bill Clinton "went wandering back to his historic, ultra-left-wing home" -- as if Clinton were in league with Amiri Baraka and Noam Chomsky.

http://www.prospect.org/print/V13/8/tomasky-m.html

[ClintonTyree]

184. Clinton, "ultra-left-wing"........

:wtf: If Bill Clinton was "ultra-left-wing" I'll vote straight Republican in November. :nuke: What bullshit. Clinton was a centrist, look at some of his "triumphs" like NAFTA etc. Ultra-left-wing my ass. If balancing a budget is ultra-left-wing then I'll eat my hat. What a fucking cretin this guy Steinhardt is. :grr:

[karynnj]

189. The NY Sun???

This goes beyond conservative, well into tabloid RW nastiness. (They also smeared Kerry on election day) Fortunately, few in NYC treats it as a serious newspaper. The New Republic is neo-con and absolutely hated Kerry. (During the primaries, writers wrote opinion pieces of why they backed each candidate - Lieberman(who the magazine officially backed), Dean, Gephardt, Edwards ....But NO Kerry).

If he was involved in the DLC though 1996, cleasrly he didn't like where Senator Kerry was in that time frame - when people here sneer he was DLC.

[Connie_Corleone]

127. If the Democrats takes his advice,

we might as well forget about any gains in November. Haven't these DLC idiots learned anything??!!

[Pacifist Patriot]

129. Apparently not.

Oh, that was rhetorical, wasn't it? ;)

[izzybeans]

130. Tell this asshole he can electioneer on somebodyelse's time.

We've got a country to protect.

[flyarm]

131. OH YEAH POLITICAL BACKLASH FOR ( ROBERTS, WAR , ALITO , NOW THIS?)

FUCK THE DLC...

so we are all now the accomplices for the crimes of this administration because the dlc tells us over and over that there will be "political backlash " for every fucking thing we stand up against..the crimes of this administration..so we should all be criminals so we get no political backlash..wtf??????????

well DLC....not in my fucking name..got it??


political "backlash " for every fucking thing the criminals in this white house commit

so when DLC do we stand up??

when our nation is a dictatorship and a total fascist state?????????

DLC ..you are not my party..you are not who i am , you are not my values, you are not the one going to face my children and tell them why their country was destroyed...

no DLC...you are neo cons along with the criminals in this white house because you enabled...you enabled a war based on lies, you enabled a president who tortured, and you enabled a cia agent being exposed, you enabled rendition of people to torturing nations for the * boys, you allowed a fascist to be named to my supreme court, you enabled spying on americans..

you DLC enabled the destrution of my constitution..but even worse , you enabled this administration to destroy the constitution for all future generations...

you are not me DLC...i will fight in the face of all of you for my nation...

for truth and honesty and my constitution...and i do not give one rats ass if there is danger in that...

you see DLC..i see the danger in doing nothing!

fly

[kurth]

132. "I think it's debatable whether he broke the law"????????

What's this shit? Perhaps Vilsack likes being watched while being penetrated.

[in_cog_ni_to]

133. K & R! Bookmarked to post whenever a DUer suggests a DLC member for prez

candidate. We MUST NEVER elect a DLC member as our candidate and this is just another reason why!

This is sickening. People wonder why we aren't in power? READ THIS FREAKIN' ARTICLE! The DLCers have taken this party so far to the right, it's hard to distinguish between the RNC and DLC. "Sensible Center?" MY ASS! :grr: Fuck the DLC!

recommend this sucker! DEMOCRATS need to read it!

[OzarkDem]

134. Pimping for Nazis

Vilsack is on the wrong side of this issue. There's no legal justification for warrantless wiretapping and it does NOTHING to keep the US safe. Current provisions are fully adequate.

Vilsack and the DLC don't have a legal, ethical or moral leg to stand on.

:thumbsdown:

[Plaid Adder]

136. Plaidder says, "Head of DLC should extricate self from

elephant's tuckus."

That is all.

The Plaid Adder

[Maru Kitteh]

138. What part of SACK do people not get about Vilsack

As your neighbor from Nebraska I have been less than impressed. I hope his aspirations go nowhere.

[zulchzulu]

139. We must be exactly like the Repugs to win in 2008

NOT!!!!!

[gulfcoastliberal]

140. Paging all DLC shills, would the DLC shills please defend this latest

outrage by your splinter cell?

[Rockholm]

141. THEY? Someone is going to get a call this morning!

The DLC is doing NOTHING but damage OUR existence.

[leesa]

143. DLC=GOP=CorporateWhores

[AndyA]

144. Vilsack needs to "come to the party"

He needs to understand that NOTHING is more important than protecting the Constitution and the rights of American citizens. Those very things define America. To lose them would have far greater implications than appearing weak.

[democrank]

145. This should stop all the

DON`T SAY BAD THINGS ABOUT THE DLC posts here. With friends like this, who needs enemies?

[Hubert Flottz]

146. Fuck his party what about the country?

That man is a coward and an idiot!

[CornField]

147. What I posted in the Iowa forum (x-post)

"Democrats are not going to win elections until they can reassure people they are going to keep them safe."

WTF is that, Tom?!?

People who believe that the foreign policy put in place by the Bush administration keeps them safe deserve nothing more than the safety it has provided. Instead of "proving ourselves" again and again and again, why don't we just start telling the truth:

1) The Bush administration manipulated evidence and flat-out lied in order to invade Iraq

2) Because the administration was so gung-ho on an Iraqi invasion, the military did not finish the job in Afghanistan and has not to this day caught Osama bin Laden (or any of his higher ups)

3) Prior to the invasion, Iraq was mostly terrorist-free. The problems between bin Laden, Al Qaeda and Hussein were well documented. Al Qaeda and bin Laden would never located their radical Islamic bases in such a "secular" country.

4) The number of innocent Iraqi civilians who have died as "collateral damage" is estimated between 100,000 and 500,000 -- not even our own government is sure how many have died.

5) The U.S. Congress handed the Bush administration the right to use force against Iraq as a bargaining chip before the U.N. It was never expected air strikes would begin so soon -- or that they would begin before the administration came back to Congress for a formal declaration of war.

6) The Bush administration repeatedly uses the attacks of Sept. 11th as a catalyst to change our country -- but not based on the recommendations put forth by the 911 Commission. Increased border security has not taken place. Airport security is even more lax than before Sept. 11th. Millions of miles of railway and highway sit as open targets. Tunnels, large enough to drive a car through, mark the U.S. and Mexico border. Only 1 out of every 250 pods are scanned at our nation's ports. If you put it all down on paper, the Bush administration has only succeeded at one thing: removing more and more fundamental rights from the American people.

Now, because we might be perceived as "opposition," we are to look the other way when the man who swore an oath to defend our Constitution insteads turns around, drops his drawers and shats all over it?!?

Guess what, Tom!? We are the opposition! And if you or any of your DLC cronies had half a spine you'd be out there raising hell about the attacks on freedom right here at home.

The Democratic Party isn't weak because we would rather try every other peaceful avenue before going to war. We aren't weak because we believe that ALL life - not just American life - is precious and should be protected and cherished. We aren't weak because we want to make sure that every American citizen has adequate healthcare, living wages and food to eat each night. Our weakness doesn't arise from our platform or from our Democratic ideals. Our weakness boils down to you and politicians like you who are unwilling to make a stand based on those ideals.

[aintitfunny]

149. UN Effing Believable (eom)

[MrBenchley]

150. And he's 100% correct

Democrats need a united message about how this imperils civil liberties....

But it seems some here are too busy inspecting Democrats for "purity" than remaining fdocused on the issues.

[Perky]

152. Amen (N/T)

[MrBenchley]

155. Seems like any statement aimed at adults flies over the heads

of many here....

[Perky]

160. Yes there is a bit of political adolescence here to be sure.

[OzarkDem]

229. Did you miss part of his message? Read again.

The part where he said Bush was right and that it was necessary to violate civil liberties for "national defense"?

Bush already had the tools he needed to intercept messages without violating the law, but he chose not to use them. Can you explain why you agree with him?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

253. "Purity"

No, it's called having principles. It's called not saying, "Me too" to the Republicans. It's called understanding that the raison d'etre for an opposition party is to OPPOSE the party in power when it's WRONG.

Anyone who doesn't understand the principle of "no searching without a warrant" is not qualified to be dogcatcher.

[ulysses]

319. of course you'd say that, purist.

Damned principles.

;-)

[Iowa]

293. Nah...

That's bullshit. Any Dem, especially a Dem in a leadership position like Vilsack, who doesn't grasp the concept of a united message regarding "civil liberties" without prodding, cajoling, printed instructions, and special tutoring, should either be shown the door, or relegated to routine, closely supervised tasks. Passing your mythical "purity" test doesn't have a damned thing to do with it. I'll try to put it as kindly as possible... it's about being too fricking dumb to carry out the day to day responsibilities of the job without hand-over-hand assistance.

[LincolnMcGrath]

302. Clearly you did not read his comment to reporters it at all.

[bloom]

310. So you think it's debatable that Bush broke the law ?

How is it being focused on the issues to be all namby-pamby about whether Bush broke the law or not ?

Wouldn't it be more united for the Democrats to condemn domestic spying as a group instead of being wishy-washy and "debating" the question?

I would think so.

Do you defend DLCers no matter what they do or say ? Do you think it reassures voters to have the "opposition" party go along with whatever crimes the Republicans party are doing ? ? ? Does this make you feel safe ? - having the DLC and the Republicans united in their crimes against the American people and "humanity" ?


Vilsack -

"If the president broke the law, that's unacceptable. But I think it's debatable whether he did," Vilsack told Des Moines Register editors and reporters.

"And I think Democrats are falling into a very, very large political trap," he said. "Democrats are not going to win elections until they can reassure people they are going to keep them safe."

[AnneD]

153. We have a saying saying here in Texas...

You have to dance with who brung you (OK not the proper English but you get the gist). Seems some of these leaders are forgetting the people that elected them and this is why we need to rid ourselves of the DLC. Prior to the Neocons takeover of the GOP, they had a wise strategy for winning the elections. But we are dealing with a different and more vicious group and we have to be more vocal and demanding of our rights. You don't play footsies with a bull elephant in musk. We have to use a 2x4 to get their attention. If these guys in the DLC don't have any balls for this, I have a spare set I can lend them. otherwise, they need to step down.

[BentleyJD]

162. yep, just keep licking boots

and showing no backbone.
The DLC does not represent the Democratic Party I have supported./
I am on the verge of saying the hell with the whole system. Theres no opposition, the Rethugs want to kill everyone but their billionaire supporters, and JOe Biden is busy combing his hair for TV.
Disgusting. But if Iowa can get rid of Vlazic(sp) and Grassley the IQ of the state will go up
take care
tony and guidedog dietrich

[mattclearing]

154. "Supporting Rule of Law Dangerous for Dems"

This is a big dumb word game. The media and Republicans are going to portray it as "wiretapping terrorists," and "defending America." When you notice how often the news media mentions how easy it is to get a FISA warrant, you see that the media is completely bent into this Republicans spin.

It is perfectly easy to tap a phone and get a warrant later. What the government is doing is blatantly illegal and totally unnecessary.

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

156. That right, Tom. Let's just roll over. So when the Bush Gestapo

start rounding us up and putting us in the internment camps, what are you gonna say then? OK, maybe I sound paranoid, but at the rate we're going...

[Ganja Ninja]

157. Maybe the Dem's need to start wearing black uniforms and ...

jack boots so people will feel comfortable voting for them. :sarcasm:

Face it folks, these people don't feel they have to do anything to get our votes. They're only interested in getting votes from hard core right wingers. After all who are left wing progressives going to vote for if not the Dem's? We're locked up as far as they're concerned.

[MadHound]

159. And people wonder why voters are leaving the party in droves

It is shit like this, the IWR, the Patriot Act, the ongoing support for the war, the failure to fight Alito and other appointments, and on and on ad nauseum.

When the Democratic party and its adherents constantly comes down on the wrong side of an issue, when the Democratic party and its adherents constantly apes Republican strategy, when the Democratic party and its adherents constantly move ever rightwards, this will force liberals, leftists, and progressives from the party. And people wonder why the party is in a losing streak.

Wake up! Rid yourself of these fascist synchophants, the DLC. Move the party back to where it belongs, on the left. Grow a spine and start fighting the policies that are hurting the world, the US population, and our society. Then you will start winning, start seeing people swarm back to the party. Until then, the party is going to continue to hemmorage voters and support.

[paulk]

243. do you have any factual evidence that "people are

leaving the party in droves"? Or that the Democrats are losing support?

just curious....

[MadHound]

268. Here you go friend

The Democrats have been losing ground since 1980.<http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=750> Don't you think it's time for a real change, something that would bring back people to the party? But sadly, the party keeps moving ever rightward, and people keep leaving. You would think that they would learn, but I guess that corporate lucre is more important than people at this point:eyes:

[paulk]

296. it seems from the polling that people are leaving the Democratic

Party to vote Republican.


That's what I get from these numbers. I look at them - and I see your analysis as completely wrong.

People are leaving the Democratic Party and joining the Republican Party. This started in 1980, with the so-called Reagan democrats.
Why did these people leave the Democrats to vote for Reagan? Because the Democratic Party was moving to the right? I hardly see that as the case. People left (and are leaving) the Democratic Party because it is too liberal. That's the only answer I can see from this data. Blame it on the Conservative control of the media - blame it on the right wing's exploitation of social value issues - but the numbers are real.

Are you saying the Democrats should run more to the left in order to win? This hasn't worked here in Colorado, at least in statewide elections. Has it worked in Missouri?

What "real change" do you see that will bring people back to the party?

[MadHound]

299. What this doesn't show is the largest growing group

That of the non-voters. Those who feel neither party addresse their needs, and thus give up. Did you realize that the vast majority of people in '04 did not vote.

If you start running on issues that the majority of Americans care about and are in favor of, you will start bringing back voters. Issues like UHC, withdrawl from Iraq, pro-choice, etc. etc. on down the line. Most Americans back these positions, but the Democratic party isn't running on them. Instead, they're trying to outright the Republicans, and thus we watch as more and more people drop out and don't vote.

[endarkenment]

161. Where are our DLC cheer leaders?

Come on guys, step up and defend this shit!

[TankLV]

263. See post 150 above & agreements.

Like clockwork.

[endarkenment]

266. It is ignored by me.

I knew we could count on them.

[LincolnMcGrath]

344. More like hit and run turd polishers

Drop in, call everyone stupid, make a hasty exit.


Pathetic really.

[Roland99]

163. DLC = Diabolical Lovers of Conservatives.

[DinahMoeHum]

166. DLC - Dick-Licking Cowards

n/t

[stickdog]

211. Dicks Like Cheney

[Lerkfish]

167. If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck....

I just want to say "I told you so".

:)

[cyberpj]

168. Here they are - Your DLC Leadership. Send them your thoughts -

By the way, they've spotlighted Kaine on their front page - so I guess we know who selected THAT puff piece to speak for our party after the SOTU.

Demand leadership that actually represents real Democrats!!

DLC LEADERSHIP:
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ka.cfm?kaid=137

CONTACT DLC:
http://www.dlc.org/cobrand/contact_us.cfm

[donheld]

170. Was Gov. Vilsack wearing a pink tutu when he said that

He should have been.

[Stuckinthebush]

172. The DLC has a new mascot

The Donkephant

God what a bunch of spineless fools.

When I hear a DLCer talk, I get a picture of that cartoon dog...Droopy talking:

"Let's just do what the GOP wants and maybe we can get votes."

[Strawman]

174. The party increasingly resembles the Democratic party circa 1860

Hopelessly splintered. The old New Deal coalition has expired and nothing has replaced it. All these issues we could coalesce around and stand for something on: opposition to the war, protection of civil liberties, limits on the Executive power of a man who seeks to rule like a dictator, and the increasing economic insecurity faced by working people. Yet we are splintered on all of them. Someone's "falling into a political trap" allright. The trap is selling out the party's message for a short term bump in the polls. What the hell is the party's raison d'etre?

We'll never accomplish anything this way. At best we'll get another President who is forced to govern preemptively on the Republicans' terms until they reorganize behind a new message. Time for a purge. The Reagan revolution is going to run out of gas soon. We need to be ready to sieze the opportunity with a coherent, progressive agenda.

[brooklynite]

176. I don't have a problem with this at all

Restrain your emotions and read the story again:

Gov. Tom Vilsack said Monday that Democrats risk political backlash if they object to the Bush administration's wiretapping but cannot show that Americans' civil liberties are at risk.

The Democratic governor, who is weighing a 2008 presidential bid, said the party will suffer if it continues to be perceived as weaker than Republicans on national security.

Vilsak's not saying that wiretapping is right or that Democrats should support it. He says, correctly, that the Democratic Party is perceived as "weak" on security (because of successful Republican propaganda and ineffectual Democratic responses), and that taking on the wiretapping issue without proving their case could further tarnish their record on the issue. The Administration has framed the arguement that the average American won't be affected by this, and I think many voters believe that. An abstract argument about "Seperation of powers" or "constitutional liberties" isn't as effective an argument as showing how real people are affected.

[stickdog]

213. You are missing the entire point. The FUCKING CASE IS PROVEN!

Bush wiretapped thousands of innocent Americans without a warrant. That is COMPLETELY ILLEGAL.

What the fuck other case are you and No-sack talking about?

[brooklynite]

235. It HASN'T been proven in the minds of the public...

Bush wiretapped thousands of innocent Americans without a warrant.

Do you know any? Does the average voter know any? I'm guessing the answer is 'no". The only person who's come forward to claim harm under this program is a guy who was convicted of plotting to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge. Hardly a sympathetic character.

I have been involved in politics for decades, and have regrettably learned by hard experience that the average voter is far less interested in and informed about these issues than you and I. The average voter doesn't peruse political websites, or read The Nation (or even The New York Times) or watch The NewsHour with Jim Lerher. They read USA Today or their local paper which probably had a four paragraph story on this that appeared after the one about the fire at the local library. They watch the local TV channel newscast which probably had a 30 second clip showing one critical Democratic comment and one response by Gonzales. They know vaguely that some issue about wiretaps has come up, that it has something to do with the "War on Terror". They might have heard the phrase FISA but have no idea what it stands for or what the law says. They've heard the Administration say this is legal and doesn't affect them if they're not talking to "bad guys". They know from the movies that the cops need to get a court order for wiretaps so there's an issue here. That's why the polls don't show 70-80-90% opposition to the Administration's program, but rather a 50-50 split (with a majority supporting wiretaps if the question is framed the right way) we see today. What Gov Vilsack is therefore saying is: don't pick this up as an issue if you're not ready and able to convince the public that your side is right; that not only is it illegal but that it also has a real affect on the lives of ordinary Americans. That requires that you craft an argument that's not only factually true, but also resonates with the voter.

FWIW, Governor Vilsack's Heartland PAC has also been sponsoring "Our Ten Words", a program to develop a simple ten word statement of what the Democratic Party stands for. Why? Because he sensibly recognizes that despite the complexities of today's issues, the message about them has to be short and concise because that's what the voters will digest and more importantly that's what the Republicans are giving them as an alternative (Tax Cuts -- Strong Defense -- Family Values -- Things are Getting Better)

You can always pick your candidates. you can't pick your voters.

[stickdog]

248. The REASON it hasn't been PROVEN to voters is Dems like Vil.

He could have USED this GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY to frame the issue quite clearly. However, Vil has no sack.

[Jujiman]

218. The "problem" is Vilsaks NOT speaking the truth!

Gov. Tom Vilsack said Monday that Democrats risk political backlash if they object to the Bush administration's wiretapping but cannot show that Americans' civil liberties are at risk.

Vilsak COULD show that Americans civil liberties are being shredded,
but he's too busy mouthing the Repugs talking points.

By mouthing these points he's showing a WEAK ASS APPEASER = Democrat!

That is part of "the problem"...

:grr:

[On the Road]

177. The DLC Has Really Gone Over the Edge This Time

On occasion, I've defended the themes of the DLC that lead Clinton, Gore, and Dean to become members. I haven't seen anything from the DLC in the last five years that shows ANY political savvy, much less any courage or principle.

What Vilsack is doing is just idiocacy. He's a sycophant. This is blatantly illegal, for cryin' out loud! And he wants everyone to just shut up?

[eve_was_framed]

179. NO Vilsack, what's dangerous for Dem's is DINO's!

[Strawman]

180. He should just make the case why civil liberties are at risk then

If he is that concerend about how the Dems will be perceived. But he doesn't. He says he's not convinced they are. And he knows how this is going to be run in the press. It's a deliberate attempt to position himself as a "moderate" with national security cred at the expense of the party. It's called selling out. He's selling people's liberties out. Doesn't that bother you?

[mntleo2]

181. LTTE To Vilsack

How disappointing for a presidential contender to align themselves with such a destructive group as the DLC. Even more disturbing are your comments about the legality of the president's wiretapping of American citizens. I am not a one issue Democrat, though some issues are more important than others. You seem to conveniently forget that the creation of the FISA court was because of the very issues you think are perfectly fine for a president to mandate. Forget the millions of common citizens who have worked so hard and given much in blood, sweat and tears to make this country great, right? Why care about that when you can get a corporate prostitute who could give a rat's behind for America, right? After all they can offshore all our jobs, use slave labor in other countries and pay YOU, right? Then they can make you a king instead of an elected servant, am I right?
Get this in your head: to keep this country great, we do not need a king we need a president. Tasks need to be done by consensus and when they cannot immediately be addressed, then FISA is our protection. A king is nothing but a burden and this was why the American Revolution occurred. Now we have another burden, this administration, which has made nothing but debt, misery, and war, for the rest of us. So, to keep this country more democratic is why the FISA court was created. Progressive ideas are what have made this country a leader in the world. However, I realize the visionless DLC hates the progressive side of the Democrats, since they are toadys to the corporatocracy. The DLC has got to go, and this Democrat will not support you since you lack any courage to stand up for a real democracy. Real Democrats refuse to be dictated by warmongering greed and the desire for one man to possess such a god-like supremacy. As a matter of fact, men and women have been willing to die to make sure it would never happen in this country. You should be ashamed!

Name, phone number and address included


Cat In Seattle

[LuckyTheDog]

182. That's chickenshit

I think we can actually play both sides of this -- FOR the wiretapping and AGAINST unlawful actions by the president.

[NewWaveChick1981]

183. Fuck "politically dangerous!" I'm not voting for an idiot who

gives away my rights to "look good politically"! I can't believe Vilsack said that. No wonder Dems are splintered and disorganized---that kind of thinking doesn't belong in the Democratic Party!

It's about time the Dems shook things up and stood up for what is right and legal. Can I FedEx the DLC some backbones???

[Donovan61]

186. Screw the backlash

How about we stand on principle for a change. Even some conservatives in Congress are against Bush's snooping on Americans without a warrant.

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

187. Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death!

Patrick Henry didn't mince words. Neither should we.

We defeated the Nazis without illegal wiretaps, we won the Cold War without illegal wiretaps.

Why the Hell do we need them now?

[GrimReefa]

188. What REALLY annoys me about this...

...is that the alleged "credibility gap" regarding National Security between the Democrats and Republicans does not really exist. I can understand Republicans talking about it, but not Democrats. The yahoos out in Nebraska and the heehaws in Alabama vote Republican, but that has nothing to do with National Security. Why? Well, because they HAVE NO STAKE in National Security. No one is attacking Assfuck, Alabama. 9/11 hit NYC and Washington. Other potential targets might include Philadelphia, Boston, Los Angeles, Chicago, Baltimore, Seattle...and what do all those cities have in common? That's right, they're in BLUE STATES (or in Philly's case, a blue area of a purple state)! If you want to see who has the National Security gap, ask the folks living in the areas that could potentially be attacked.

Opposing Presidential wiretapping is NOT a political risk, because anybody stupid enough to think that it's a good thing the President is going around spying on American citizens without a warrant is voting Republican anyway.

[bullwinkle428]

190. On behalf of the all of the other Democrats from the state of Iowa,

I sincerely apologize for Tom Vilsack! Feel so ashamed, so ashamed...

[MadisonProgressive]

192. Throw your 'presidential bid' out the window, asshole!

[Laura PourMeADrink]

193. I agree with much of what he says. I posted the same idea from

Dick Morris last week. This is NOT about the messenger. This is about strategy. This is not about walking away from what is right - the wiretapping scheme is totally wrong. But, the truth is that the unfortunate byproduct of raising the civil liberties issue is that it gives the repigs the ammunition and the platform to once again call us weak on defense.

The real question is how can the Democrats keep the illegal wire tapping issue alive without falling victim to the "weak on defense" argument. We sorely need a strategist.

[stickdog]

216. It's not fucking difficult. The Constitution and Bill of Rights protect

our sacred liberties. The separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution protect us from the tyranny of dictatorships.

FISA lets you wiretap anyone you want and get back to the court later. The only framed needed here is, "Why not use FISA unless it's NOT terrorists whom you're wiretapping?"

[Laura PourMeADrink]

331. you missed the point. I totally agree - illegal wiretapping is a

total travesty. And, we should fight it to the end. My only point is, and it is more of an observation, that we are opening the door to allow the BFEE to, once again, spout the rhetoric, "I will do anything to keep you safe." Prior to the issue being raised, they had no platform to talk about this.

There is no causal effect between the two issues. Only that we create a platform. That is not to say we shouldn't fight for what is right, against illegal spying, but the reality is that without a nexus between the two issues, we are once again playing into their hand... IMHO....

[nuxvomica]

194. Let's keep going with this appeasement strategy!

:mad:

[Bob3]

195. Head of DLC needs to be sewn into a Canvas sack

and dropped into a cornfield somewhere where he can't do anymore damage. We have a direct thereat to the very structure of the Republic and this ass clown is talking about what the Democrats should or should not say. Jesus shut up.

Safety is not the issue. * has not kept us safe - hell 2,250 service men and women have died and over 3,000 civilians have died under his watch. this is safe? How safe did he keep us from katrina.
He is a small petty, bloodthirsty incompetent yahoo who's primary concern is the safety of his lily white ass and giving as much tax money to his friends as he can.

The issue is not wiretaps, it is not the fight against terrorism, it is the abuse of power by the executive branch to authorize spying on Americans with only their word to assure us that they are not listening in on common citizens and political foes or even members of their own party - that's the damn issue.

[dbonds]

196. NOT opposing wiretaps is dangerous to everyone.

[blm]

198. Sorry - but this sounds like they're still listening to Bill Clinton.

.

[Talismom]

200. Oh man! These guys are traitors and corporate whores of the

highest order! They are truly no better than the neocons and must be fought with everything we have!

[Jacobin]

201. O. M. G.

Could they be anymore out of fucking touch?

:mad:

[nolabels]

202. Democrats risk political backlash if they fall off turnip truck

Btw what turnip truck did this fool fall off

Maybe the headline should read "Democrats risk political backlash if the endorse the 'Bill of Rights'"


DLC go jump in the lake already

[AlGore-08.com]

203. "Who is weighing a 2008 Presidential bid" is the important bit

Vilsack (or as one TV pundit recently nailed him "Governor What's-his-name") is just another idiot who sees Bush's poll numbers in the toilet so he rushes to embrace Bush's unpopular policies. The log jam of morons who can't tell the difference between beltway thinking and common sense will just grow between now and 2008.

[milkyway]

204. Who opposes wiretapping suspected terrorists?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

257. If they're suspected terrorists, get a warrant

Constitution 101

Only, you have to prove probably cause to a judge. This cramps one's style when one wants to spy on people who are merely being annoying to the government, not treasonous or criminal.

[MarinCoUSA]

205. and Seig Hiel! into english is? And w/ a Texas accent please!

n/t

[rocktivity]

207. American civil liberties ARE at risk

because without those warrants, there's nothing to stop the president from spying on ANYONE he wants!!!

:eyes:
rocknation

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

208. It's a clear and direct violation of the 4th Amendment

Is this so hard to say?

Not only are BushCo's activities illegal, but Congress can't change the laws to make them legal because of the 4th Amendment. It's a direct assualt on the Bill of Rights.

[madrchsod]

210. isn`t one of the members of the dlc

a former republican party operative?

[Don Claybrook]

212. I sent him the link to this page

It said, "Dear Vilsack Staffer, check this link if you want to see what real Democrats and progressives think about the DLC and about your statement. Warning, it isn't pretty, but you need to see it".

It couldn't hurt for one of his staffers to see the vitriol. It probably won't go anywhere, but it only cost me 2 minutes.

[denek]

214. National Security or Insecurity?

With all of this painting of Democrats being soft on security let's take an educated look at what is being “sold” to the public. First, the neo-con thugs have been selling “fear” since September 11, 2001, a tragedy that occurred under their watch! As for information, they had more information pertaining to such a happening, and without illegal wiretaps, yet they not only did nothing about that information, there is evidence that Dick Cheney even ordered a complete stand down of our military that would have limited the deaths of that day. It is also known the Secret Service in charge of protecting our President, as well as those assigned to the protection of our Secretary of Defense, did nothing to protect those individuals. How did they know those individuals were not in harm's way? So, since that day the corporate media has been portraying them, the neo-cons, as the protectors of our lives. Yikes, under fire, they proved to do nothing! Next, let's discuss “national security.” Is stripping the citizenry of their civil liberties, their freedoms, making us more secure? Did the Germans under the Nazi regime have security? Their government was off invading countries who supposedly posed a threat to the German people, had ultra-intelligence gathering devices in place (okay, spying), had stripped the citizens of their civil liberties in the name of keeping them secure, had implemented detention centers in which “enemies of the state” were held and even tortured in order to gain information that would show they were trying to keep their people secure, controlled what information the citizens received, and destroyed their economy. Sound familiar? Still feel secure? As for the Democrats, where are they in educating the people of what is happening to our democracy? As the actions of the neo-cons has nothing to do with keeping America secure, neither does the silence of the democrats.

[Burried News]

332. Nice post - welcome to DU. As mentioned up thread ...

we defeated the Nazis and didn't have to subvert the constitution. We don't have to do it to handle al Qaeda.

[Beelzebud]

215. DLC: Being an opposition party would be dangerous for the Dems.

FUCK THE DLC

[adigal]

217. Standing up for Constitution poses great risks

Well, if Democrats go down over this, at least they will go down fighting for the Constitution. People like Vilsack, who measure everything politically, are the reason Americans don't trust the Dems with their safety. It is so fricking simple.

[Kansas Wyatt]

219. Liberty or Death!

And I do not give a shit whether a Republican, Democrat, or both hears the demand and sees the line in the sand.

[madmark]

220. this guy doesn't give much for the 4th amendment; you know this

is not even a democrat/republican issue, its a constitutional/unconstitutional issue. We don't have our form of government anymore if this warrantless spying of americans stands.

[tlsmith1963]

222. Excuse Me, But...

This isn't about us being soft on terrorism. They can spy on actual terrorists all they want. I don't like the fact that they are using the wiretaps to spy on Democrats & other progressives they don't like. That is McCarthyism. It has nothing to do with fighting terrorists. Maybe we need to make this more clear, because it doesn't seem to be sinking into peoples' heads. Spy on terrorists all you want, but don't spy on *me*. I am not a terrorist.

Tammy

[longship]

223. "Dems say opposing Dems Dangerous for DLC"

nt

[Rainscents]

226. I hate DLC!!! DLC is republican and they are out there to destroy

democratic value!!!

[cyclezealot]

227. If he is saying we need demonstrate our liberties are at stake/

well, he is right. Can't criticize without making our case of wiretaps' threats to our liberty.
In court you have to make your case. Hope that is what he is saying.
Is he of the DLC? Thought he had been a progressive.

[Debi]

228. Oh Bother...the guy is Governor of my state

Please don't blame ALL Iowa Democrats for his behavior.

The sad part is that he was elected as the 'working man's Governor' being supported by the UAW and Iowa Federation of Labor.

He has been the republicans greatest gift. It has been sad.

[deutsey]

230. "Vilsack" is a variation on the word Vichey

[brainshrub]

231. Will they just freaking join the Republican party already?

Sheesh!

[cyberpj]

241. I believe many of them came from there. Plants to break up the Dem party.

[pauldp]

232. If "we cannot show that Americans' civil liberties are at risk" WTF?

They won't tell us how many people have been spied on or any details about
who they have been spying on. End of story. How fucking blatant do the abuses have to be?

[McCamy Taylor]

233. BEWARE! Wolfowitz and the Neo-cons want to take over the DEMS!

They may be infiltrating as we speak. They have already overstayed their welcome with the Repubs and Wolfowitz never did change his party affiliationa dn has said all along if the GOP gets rid of them they will just switch back to Democrat.

[Vinca]

234. This is both repugnant and ridiculous.

Democrats do not have to be Republicans to win elections. (Although it wouldn't hurt to own those Republican-held voting machine companies.) The wiretapping issue has only one point that distinguishes the Democrats from the Republicans: legality. Democrats want the taps done legally - either with a warrant or by changing the FISA law - and Republicans apparently don't. I honestly can't figure out what the Bushies have their panties in a knot about - just get the damn warrant or change the damn law. (And, lurking 'pukes, here's a news flash: the bad guys are smart enough to know about this stuff already.) As for Vilsack, I'm disgusted with Democrats who parrot the "soft on defense" mantra put out by the Republicans.

[Joey Liberal]

238. Screw the DLC

They've got no balls.

[aquart]

239. I do not want this crud for president.

He's licking his chops at having all that power.

[flyarm]

242. can any iowans please help need town and zip and address to send lttr

i keep trying to send a lteer to vilsack and it won't go through..i have used a goggle zip code...and town name but it just won't go through...any help would be greatly appreciated!!

fly

[Debi]

254. I hope you're kidding - if not, here you go

Contact Information

Web Site: www.governor.state.ia.us
E-mail: Contact Via 'Web Form.'

State Capitol
Des Moines, IA 50319-0001
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

Washington Office:
400 N. Capitol St., NW, Ste. 359
Washington 20001
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]






http://government.aol.com/mygov/bio/?id=9489

[yurbud]

244. With careful, cautious work, we can snatch defeat from the jaws of victory

love,

the DLC

[flyarm]

245. if/when sending lttr to vilsack that you are aware gannon/guckert

was at the hearing yesterday..and ask vilsack how he got into the hearing when he could not get a press pass into the Capitol..and was gannon/guckert there as a warning or threat to dems and repubs on the judical committee!!

really why was gannon there???

was he there to put fear into any on that committee..was he there to shut up dems or rethug??

was he there as a warning or a threat??

i just wonder!!

fly

[meowomon]

256. Threat

Known male "escort" in D.C. He has the goods on many of these guys. Probably tapes and 5 by 7 glossies. By the way, doesn't lifelong bachelor and known anti-gay Senator from South Carolina, Lindsey Graham have the loveliest blue eyes? And his hands are so soft and he gestures with such a flair. I wonder if he and Gannon/Guckert are acquainted? (Femmes usually like a burly top to boss them around.) Y'all should check out blogactive.com for some wicked outings of anti-gay closeted polititians who vote for discriminating against their own. "Uncle Thoms", I call them!

[fooj]

288. Welcome to DU.

Peace.

[yurbud]

246. translation: backlash from corporate donors

[mzmolly]

249. Mr. Vilsack might I remind you that Clinton had one attack on US soil

from outside terrorists, and that attack was one month after he took office. Democrats have DEMONSTRATED their ability to "keep us safe."

As for civil liberties being in jeopardy, what more proof does one need? The President isn't going to come out with his administrations laundry list!

As it is today undet this administration the feds (without court approval) can:

1. read mail/email
2. tap phones
3. torture american citizens and our so called enemies
4. order americans to be executed without trial

But, sure our civil liberties remain in tact. :eyes:

[yurbud]

250. Tell DNC to NOT give money to DLC and CC to DLC (LINK to both)

Will Howard Dean do it? No.

But it will put the fear of god into those ass weasels at the DLC who only care about collecting money and are probably acutely aware that no one really likes them.

DLC:

http://www.dlc.org/cobrand/contact_us.cfm

DNC:

http://www.democrats.org/page/s/contact

An ironic note: During the 2004 election, I noticed that the Kerry campaign website had discussion boards/comments features prominently available, and the Bush/GOP sites didn't.

Neither does the DLC.

Even the link to contact them was tiny at the bottom.

they also had this little gem about their senate caucus posted there:

Senators Evan Bayh (IN), Bob Graham (FL), Mary Landrieu (LA), Joe Lieberman (CT) and Blanche Lincoln (AR) founded the Senate New Democrat Coalition (SNDC) in the spring of 2000 to provide a unified voice in the U.S. Senate for progressive ideas, mainstream values, and innovative, market-based policy solutions.

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=250061&kaid=103&subid=111

Hmmmm....don't we already have one party devoted to market based solutions? How well is that going for most Americans?

[Heewack]

251. He's probably correct.

The particular FISA law will have to be found Constitutional and it is questionable if it is especially at a time of war. Congress seems to be more upset that they weren't better informed, than any breaking of the law. Then there would need to be a supermajority to get him removed. That's an unlikely scenario in and of itself.

When this story first broke and Dickless offered up the explanation that it was a concerted effort to regain presidential powers lost over the past few decades and said that it would be dangerous politically to question the president's authority to perform such searches it was crystal clear that they wanted to make this divisive political issue. It has Rove trap written all over it. I think some are starting to see that. So I don't blame him for treading lightly as he is probably correctly feels that there will be no end game to this situation in the near future.

Note that I am not saying I agree with the wiretapping in the least or that it shouldn't be pursued to the fullest extent, but I'm just not seeing where we come out ahead on this deal politically or legally. I don't see impeachment coming from this, and if the public does end up seeing it as the right thing to do to protect the country it could be explosive to the party.

Here's the rope... go ahead and hang me.

[mmonk]

255. First, it was signed into law

and second, there was no electronic survelance when the constitution was written but the fourth amendment specifies what a government cannot violate and electronic surveilance of Americans without any probable cause seems to violate what is specified in the substance and intent of the fourth amendment.

[Heewack]

269. Yes, it would seem that way

But even our own Senators are less than certain in calling it a definite crime, which leads me to believe there is a question on the authority to do so. To me what Vilsack is saying is that unless there is some direct evidence that someone in particulars rights were violated it may be difficult to pursue.

[yurbud]

283. that is an odd point for him to make at this point when Democrats are

far more likely to err on the side of caution as they have again and again and again.

[yurbud]

260. FATAL MISTAKE: see that you can't win, so you don't even call it a crime

Democrats can't win VOTES in ELECTIONS if they don't establish a track record of standing up for certain core values like our civil rights.

No one expects them to win many or maybe even ANY battles in the minority, but they at least have to get on the record be honest about what is going on and voting accordingly.

Otherwise, the prove the ass-weasel Scott McClellan right when he trots out his response to Democratic critics of the Iraq War: How did the vote on the War Resolution?

He could use that same defense on a lot of issues the Democrats rolled over on.

So I don't blame him for treading lightly as he is probably correctly feels that there will be no end game to this situation in the near future.

[Heewack]

273. I agree with what you are saying

But I think it is important to have a good idea where we can expect this to lead. If it is determned that it will likely lead to nowhere then the presidential hopefulls have to be mindful of that. Evidently he sees it as a problem in that most Americans will expect the president to do everything he can to prevent another terrorist attack even if that means violating the constitution. A lot of congressmen have come out and said they would likely give the authority if approached about the issue, which shows me they are more concerned with protocol and the executive not usurping their power.

The usurping of congressional power is really what I think the legal issue will be not the warrantless wiretapping.

Standing up is important, but how many bullets can we stand to take at this point especially on the issue of national security? They are obviously going to make it an issue again and again, downplaying that or coming across as seemingly against that fight will be a very dangerous proposition. Let the others that aren't trying to get into the WH carry the issue.

[yurbud]

281. Why would someone vote for a coward with no track record on

serious issues?

You are not taking bullets, you are developing a track record.

John Conyers has stood up on all these issues, and though he lacks charisma in person, probably 99% of the people here would take a bullet for him if he was running for president.

I don't think too many of the so-called leaders of the party would get that kind of loyalty--or deserve it.

It seems like the party has taken grasping for undecided voters to absurd extremes and the exclusion of their base, essentially ignoring anything they could learn from GOP successes.

[stickdog]

295. It ain't a Rove trap unless Dems let Rove frame their responses

and cow them into mealy-mouth Vilsacks.

[Jack Rabbit]

303. I disagree with your points, Mr. Heewack

In the lead paragraph, Vilsack is reported to have made the point that Democrats must show that Bush is putting Americans' civil liberties at risk.

That shouldn't be too difficult. A warrant-less wiretap puts Americans' civil liberties at risk. There is no other way to put it.

Our own senators are not calling it a crime because most of them are attorneys who supposedly know better than to assert a crime has been committed before one has been proved to have been committed. Even if no law was broken, that doesn't mean that Bush was right or that his willful violation of the Fourth Amendment isn't an impeachable offense (it is).

Governor Vilsack made one good point when he said, "Democrats are not going to win elections until they can reassure people they are going to keep them safe." That is true.

I would emphasize to Governor Vilsack and any other Bush apologist in the DLC that I expect Democrats to keep us safe from the Bush junta. They've done a lousy job of it up to now.

[IowaGuy]

252. Good-bye Tom......I always liked Christie better anyway.....n/t

[yurbud]

258. POLL on same page show Iowans disagree with him (GRAPHS)

He is not representing the views of his own constituents, let alone those of Americans in general.

When will the DLC get it? Without Clinton's charm, you can't sell this snake oil shit.

[eyepaddle]

259. I just want to add my voice to the disgust with the DLC

Most of what I would like to say has already been covered by other DUers, but what can we specfically do to destroy the DLC.

How batshit crazy AND out of touch do you need to be spout this garbage like Vilsack?

[GOPFighter]

261. WOW! Just WOW!

Has it come to this? We should shut up about protecting our traditional, hard won rights because we might be perceived as weak???!

You MF'er! YOUR response is why we are perceived as weak. You and your spineless bretheren would give away our freedoms just we don't appear "weak"? That's dispicable!!!

[yurbud]

262. Vilsack is Slavic for "empty scrotum"

[whododayis]

265. DLC=DarepugLiCans Lite

whatever happened to the party that would rather lose on principle than cave for expediancy. i would rather we opposed the wiretapping altogether on the grounds that it is just plain illegal and wrongheaded, than trying to develop a politically viable position that leads us nowhere anyway. my party has left me behind, and sadly it may not come back for a long long time.

[aden_nak]

274. Maybe the Democrats should worry about backlash from their base, for once.

You ever notice that it's always a "political trap" to oppose the Neoconservative agenda? How is that possible? Sure, it slapped down a few Democrats in the 2002 mid-terms. But Bush's approval rating is LESS THAN HALF of what it was then. In fact, it's damn near ONE THIRD of what it was in the fall of 2002. Bush claims he doesn't look at poll numbers, but usually I feel like it's the Democrats who don't know how to fucking read them.

[truebrit71]

275. How does spying on US citizens make them safe?

And why the fuck is this spineless ass-half speaking on behalf of the Democratic party?

The reason the Democrats won't winis if we listen to fucking morons like Tom Vil (Ball)Sack....

[BushWhackedNoMore]

276. This guy sounds like a Repug

"If the president broke the law, that's unacceptable. But I think it's debatable whether he did"

Exactly, it is debatable and therefore requires debate and questions to be asked, duh!!!:dunce:

"And I think Democrats are falling into a very, very large political trap," he said. "Democrats are not going to win elections until they can reassure people they are going to keep them safe."

We can keep America safe from outside dangers just as well - or better than - the GOP, the question is: who's going to keep us safe from from the tyranny and fascism now being fostered in our country? I wish our Dem leaders :boring: would hurry up and learn to lead!

:banghead:

[FSogol]

277. This attitude is exactly why Dems lose elections.

Do the right thing stupid. Stop trying to calculate the political costs.

[WI_DEM]

278. I wouldn't expect anything less from "the head of the DLC"

[MODemocrat]

279. This seems like a bag of crap to me

Who is the DLC trying to kid now? So they're to let Bush off the hook again, and for something so serious; hello Imperialism.:smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke:

[GeorgeGist]

282. Wonder what dirt Bush has on Vilsack?

[spanone]

284. I couldn't disagree more. Mr. Vilsack is a problem.

Obeying the law is a BIG DEAL in my United States.

[colbushwhacker_2000]

285. Vilsack can go

straight to hell, and I am from Iowa. I have nevaer had high hopes for Vilsack. Screw him !

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

287. There are statesmen, there are leaders, there are patriots and then there

are politicians. Tom Vilsack and the DLC are politicians, whose major engine is political expediency and "what sells."

[confludemocrat]

290. what? Freedom and Equality didn't focus-group test well for DLC bozos?

so this is their brain-dead response strategy instead of real LEADERSHIP? god, how utterly hopeless these people are
whaddya wanna bet he doesn't have his supporters here at DU?

[TInCanCommunications]

291. Fuck'em and make sure we don't put these fuckers on the ballot

Sick of these Repukes taking over the party.

[derby378]

292. Vilsack: "I, for one, welcome our new crab overlords..."

Just pathetic.

[Joe Chi Minh]

294. What a shocketr of Governor to have on your side.

The alternative to his living in a fantasy world - which is the reality in any case (think "elections"!) - is not very nice to contemplate. Come back, Zell.... all is forgiven...

[yorkiemommie1]

298. and sieg heil to you too, guv!

with 'friends' like this .....

[neuvocat]

300. The DLC is why I left the Dems in the first place.

They're using old, busted-ass arguments that have been debunked years ago. Apparently they weren't listening to Al Gore's last speech when he pointed out that we didn't curtail our civil liberties during any other war. This doesn't hurt the Dems at all-unless they listen to the DLC.

[Dembo98]

304. Question?

Being an avid reader and never wanting to sound stupid, I have been doing a lot of reading on FISA. As much as I don't like it, it seems to me that if you look at a couple court rulings (the "Keith case" and the "Truong case), the courts of appeal are unanimous in their decisions that warrantless wiretapping is OK when the primary purpose is for foreign intelligence. Even if one of the parties is an American citizen. Please tell me I am reading these rulings wrong. If not, it seems to me that the courts have already ruled and that it is legal. Someone help.

[LynnTheDem]

306. The THIRD TIME you've posted this exact Q. The cases you refer to

were BEFORE FISA.

The law is plain & simple; wiretapping without a warrant is ILLEGAL.

[LynnTheDem]

307. dupe

[Perky]

305. Funny how DUers trusts MSM when they want to pick a fight with moderates.

It was a lousy short article and the two or three statement coould have been taken completely out of context.

I for one would want to know more of the context before I pass judgement.

I think he is spot on regarding the perception issue and spot-off if he thinks the warrantless wiretaps were legal. But all he said was that the issue was debatable and the polling suggest that the country is divided on the issue.

[LincolnMcGrath]

308. Where did he mention polling? Or did you toss that in yourself?

"If the president broke the law, that's unacceptable. But I think it's debateable whether he did,"

If and Debateable = Mealy-Mouthed Hand Wringing

[Perky]

309. If you go to the link provided in the OP

There is a poll to the right of the three paragraph article

[LincolnMcGrath]

312. You claimed the COUNTRY was divided.

The 'Des Moines Register Poll' of 801 Iowans is the only one showed. (On the left of the the 7 paragraph article)

And that is a horrid poll to begin with. "Monitoring" It's SPYING

[Perky]

315. ANd the point was/is the article was too short to draw any real

conclusions about Vilsack comment.

The paper maybe as conservative as the Washington Times.
JUst asking for the provebial gain of salt.

[LincolnMcGrath]

343. I think you were trying to polish a turd, and got caught brown handed.

From You above;
"Yes there is a bit of political adolescence here to be sure."

[Iowa]

313. Hmmm...

"I for one would want to know more of the context before I pass judgement."

That would be a reasonable approach if Vilsack didn't already have a long and sorry record of cowardice, unprincipled actions, and appeasement. It fits Vilsack perfectly.

This is a guy whose department heads sneak around and spy on the email of Iowa State employees looking for dirt. Any criticism of management (between employees) is dealt with harshly via written reprimand or outright dismissal. That's the kind of guy he is - he'd do exactly what Bush is doing. Anyone close to Iowa State government wouldn't need to know the context before passing judgment on this ass.

[NobleCynic]

311. The DLC should be disbanded

In politics, the coward will always lose ground. This is why our party has been losing ground. If you're going to oppose the Republicans oppose them for crying out loud. Waffling middling weak language like this insures defeat. Appeasement doesn't work. Fight the Republicans or join them. The time for middle ground is passing. Gone.

[WestMichRad]

316. Dem leadership, take note:

If you choose to back off on protecting our constitutional rights, as this issue surely is, there is NO REASON WHATSOEVER for many of us to continue to support Democratic candidates. As the minority party, you owe it to us to at least stand up for our constitutional rights, now that you've capitulated on many other issues and let the repukes run roughshod over our nation. If you won't support us on preserving the Constitution, get out of the way so that we can elect representatives that will REPRESENT us.

Let there be peace.

[thethinker]

317. We need to show Vilsack what a backlash looks like

Everyone here needs to send an email or fax to this clown.

When our elected Democrats start acting like republicans, they need to hear from us. We need to bring pressure to bear on these idiots. Vilsack may be getting his funding from the DLC, but he has to get his votes from the people.

And when he, and others like him, comes up for re-election, we need to replace them with Democrats.

[ikojo]

318. Why does the DLC continue to pander and support

the policies of a president with a 38% approval rating?

If more Americans knew this wiretapping was going on, they would be up in arms about it. Thing is, I don't think it's well known to most Americans.

[Maestro]

321. I can't stand Vilsack!

He is very rethug in many of his views on education and obviously this. He's scared because he doesn't want all those mean rethug constituents to oppose him and, gasp, say bad things about him. The wiretapping is completely illegal and even Specter says so.

[rurallib]

322. Vil may have cut his own sack on this one.

I am embarrassed to say he is my governor. Well he is still better than any regressive.

[momaloney]

324. Wiretapping...see this article...

I sent letters to all the senators over the weekend to stand
firm and vote against Gonzo....told them we were proud of how
the stuck like glue during the Alito vote....they did the same
thing at the hearing on the swearing in of Gonzo....

This is the reason the repubs are sticking together....read
this article and then start screaming...it was on Countdown
tonight, but I didn't see it anywhere else...yet!  Rove has to
go....

Issue Date: February 6-12, 2006, Posted On: 2/6/2006

Rove counting heads on the Senate Judiciary Committee

Presidential adviser Karl Rove carried his files and luggage
after arriving with President Bush in Dallas on Feb. 3. (L.M.
Otero/AP)
The White House has been twisting arms to ensure that no
Republican member votes against President Bush in the Senate
Judiciary Committee’s investigation of the administration's
unauthorized wiretapping.
Congressional sources said Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove has
threatened to blacklist any Republican who votes against the
president. The sources said the blacklist would mean a halt in
any White House political or financial support of senators
running for re-election in November.
"It's hardball all the way," a senior GOP
congressional aide said.
The sources said the administration has been alarmed over the
damage that could result from the Senate hearings, which began
on Monday, Feb. 6. They said the defection of even a handful
of Republican committee members could result in a
determination that the president violated the 1978 Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act. Such a determination could lead
to impeachment proceedings.
Over the last few weeks, Mr. Rove has been calling in
virtually every Republican on the Senate committee as well as
the leadership in Congress. The sources said Mr. Rove's
message has been that a vote against Mr. Bush would destroy
GOP prospects in congressional elections.
"He's [Rove] lining them up one by one," another
congressional source said.
Mr. Rove is leading the White House campaign to help the GOP
in November’s congressional elections. The sources said the
White House has offered to help loyalists with money and free
publicity, such as appearances and photo-ops with the
president.
Those deemed disloyal to Mr. Rove would appear on his
blacklist. The sources said dozens of GOP members in the House
and Senate are on that list.
So far, only a handful of GOP senators have questioned Mr.
Rove's tactics.
Some have raised doubts about Mr. Rove's strategy of painting
the Democrats, who have opposed unwarranted surveillance, as
being dismissive of the threat posed by al Qaeda terrorists.
"Well, I didn't like what Mr. Rove said, because it
frames terrorism and the issue of terrorism and everything
that goes with it, whether it's the renewal of the Patriot Act
or the NSA wiretapping, in a political context," said
Sen. Chuck Hagel, Nebraska Republican.

There you go....No react.  This was on Huffinton's post last
night and I couldn't find the entire article there tonight,
but I didn't hunt for it.  It is from www.insightmag.com and
you must have a subscription to read the entire article...but
Arianna had it up last night.

Time for heads to roll.....................

 

[MrSlayer]

325. So why don't we call for expanded spying and an end to warrants altogether

Let's out-brownshirt the brownshirts. Let's really go nuts on the fascism in the name of safety.

We'll call for a total ban on free speech, we'll call for an end to miranda rights, we'll call for TV cameras in everyone's home, we'll call for the end of trials by jury. All in the name of safety, because we don't want to look weak.

This guy is a friggin ass.

[salib]

326. This is why we MUST contribute to Dean and the DNC

The DLC has clout only because of maoney raised (in the past especially). Let's help Dean drown THOSE beasts in our support through small, widespread donations.

[PassingFair]

348. I'm ponying up a few more pennies...

on Friday...payday!

Thanks for the reminder. Don't forget DFA and direct support of dems.
And don't forget to save some for Lamont in Connecticut!

I hear he his threshold of volunteers!

[FredStembottom]

327. I'll say this again

and again and again until the DLC is out of our hair for good:
They are a fifth column. A plant. A part of the problem.
I think it's just a matter of time until it is shown that they are a planned and executed part of the big Neo-con conspiracy. Probably the most effective part of the plan. We were never so defeated as we have been since the DLC started calling the shots. It was a plummet to the bottom once they gained sway over official Washington Democrats.

And if they somehow _aren't_ an official operation of the neo-con coup - HOW COULD ANYONE EVER TELL THE DIFFERENCE??????
:mad:

[RoyGBiv]

333. I'll remember this...

Vilsack can kiss my ass.

[Nothing Without Hope]

337. MY translation: Dangerous to Dems because of BLACKMAIL by Bushies:

For example:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x338735
thread title (2-6-06 GD): Ex-Reagan official- Dubya uses spying to blackmail media & Dems
No proof, but he lays it out clearly.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x342591
thread title (2-6-06 GD): Rove Threatens Republican Senators...
(this one is about threats of political non-support, but come on, you KNOW that's not their only leash.)

The spying is data mining and it started right after Bush took office.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x346899
thread title (2-7-06 GD): READ!! -- NSA doc proves "Bush Authorized Domestic Spying BEFORE 9/11"

Anyone who thinks about it will realize that gathering blackmail data to control opponents and keep GOPs, Dems and the media in line no matter what would be a high priority. Likely key judges too. I also think this is where JimmyJeff GannonGuckert and his "escort" service came into real play, so to speak. I (and others) went into all that a year ago during Gannongate. For example:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1609452

I think something similar happened nnder Regan/Bush41 - see this report - investigation was suppressed, of course:
http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2003/02/1570946.php

[Nothing Without Hope]

338. Today I heard Biden talking about how what was wrong with the Iraq

War is that they did it incompetently. It was on NPR, the "Fresh Air" program. Here's a link to the NPR page on it:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5192969
Biden did NOT mention that Iraq never should have been invaded or that it was all based on lies. No, it was all about how more soldiers were needed and wasn't it bad that the Republicans didn't give them enough body armor. (Of COURSE it's terrible that the incompetence and lack of body armor cost so many lives, but the point is, the war should never have happened at all.) HE STILL SUPPORTS THE IRAQ WAR, just like the other DLC Vichy Dems. It's a plank in their appeasement platform. Letting Bush skate on Spygate is another.

These people are fascist enablers and must be forced out of power. We are well into a police state, and these corrupt idiots are still blathering with politics as usual.

[OG Yankee Patriot]

341. Dammit, From the VERY SAME NEWSPAPER That Day

is a big article about how Iowans are FED UP with the way things are going (59%) and how they are NOT willing to trade civil liberties for spying.
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060131/NEWS09/601310391

I don't get this move, what was he thinking? Espousing Karl Rove talking points is not helpful, sir.
The Repubs have run the bus into the ditch, here Vilsack appears to be helping tow it out.

[LincolnMcGrath]

347. Kick

Come On Anti-Progressives, drop in and defend this nonsense.

[Burried News]

350. Tweedle d lc

[rocktivity]

351. It's the WARRANTLESS wiretapping we oppose, STUPID!

And we SHOULD oppose it because warrantless wiretapping gives the president carte blanche to spy on ANYONE HE WANTS--including DEMS!!!

:headbang:
rocknation